By Skyler Baldwin | S.C. Rep. Spencer Wetmore, D-Charleston, this week said she plans to file a bill again that would make businesses that sell alcoholic food products follow the same rules as those that sell alcoholic beverages.
“I’m definitely going to look into filing to regulate so they have to follow the same rules,” she told the Charleston City Paper, Statehouse Report’s sister publication.
Wetmore, along with S.C. Rep. Micah Caskey, R-Lexington, co-sponsored a bill last year that passed the S.C. House by a 66-35 vote March 30, 2022, but it didn’t pick up steam after being left stranded in the S.C. Senate Judiciary Committee when the session ended.
“I think a lot of restaurants that have to follow all the licensing laws are still interested in this issue,” Wetmore said. “But we will need the Senate to come to the table if it’s going to be something we’re going to address.”
If the bill were to become law, it would have a major impact on businesses that sell alcohol-infused products. This includes Charleston-based food truck Booze Pops, which has been able to sell boozy popsicles in over a dozen locations across the state thanks to a loophole that classifies its products as food.
Booze Pops owner Woodrow Norris started the business with a single van about eight years ago. Last year’s bill would have shut down the business unless he found a brick and mortar location. If Wetmore files a bill this session, it could have a similar impact.
“We went through hell on this,” Norris told the City Paper Monday before declining further comment.
Concern about the product is nothing new. In 2017, the city of Charleston wrote a letter to the state Department of Revenue (DOR), citing concerns about street vendors selling alcohol-infused products to the public on the street.
Several state offices have partial or presumed jurisdiction over alcoholic products, particularly because of language in Title 61 of state law, which governs alcohol and alcoholic beverages. Frozen desserts aren’t mentioned in that section.
“Booze pops, ice cream and gelatin are not governed by Title 61 and are not under the Department of Revenue’s jurisdiction,” said DOR spokesman Tim Smith. “Some argue that they are regulated under Title 39 by the S.C. Department of Agriculture. … We do not know if the product should be tested in a frozen or liquid state.”
According to the federal Alcohol, Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), “ice cream and ices” are not considered beverages when “only sufficient spirits are used for flavoring purposes.” The TTB generally draws that line at not greater than 2% alcohol by weight. Popsicles, however, are a bit different. According to the TTB’s website, a review of a range of different frozen desserts, popsicles and similar products generally have a higher density than ice cream and therefore often contain higher concentrations of alcohol.
It is not known how much alcohol is contained in a single serving of Booze Pops’ popsicles.
As of Friday, no bill had been filed regarding alcohol-infused food products.
Skyler Baldwin is a reporter with the Charleston City Paper, where this story first appeared.
- Have a comment? Send to feedback@statehousereport.com
We Can Do Better, South Carolina!
I absolutely do not approve of them playing a super Mario Bros. theme in my neighborhood which would primarily attract kids and or underage individuals to a truck selling adult beverages or alcoholic frozen treats. My kids came running outside to see what is was when it stopped at my cul de sac.